Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[crs1026]

I don't mean to seem aggressive, but something does have to give.

I will unapologetically pick the traffic lanes.

In the context of completing a street that has been selected as a high volume transit corridor, which is about to attract the resulting densification, I will agree with you. Eglinton needs to become a "total avenue" - meaning it must be walkable, cyclable, traffic must be calmed, large vehicles must be diverted to some other path etc. The investment in a subway enables all this....so let's not waste the opportunity.

There is the problem however of ensuring that materiel and services have adequate and appropriate pathways into the city. No point in densifying and then having this denser community choking because deliveries have been forced off the traditional main avenues (Notice I didn't say "drivers" or "automobiles".... I'm thinking plumbers' vans, Purolator trucks, beer and food supply chain, goods for small retail stores, and construction materials and so forth. More density = more plumbers!)

Eglinton has traditionally been just such a pathway. It's the terminal pathway from the 401 in the West end, 400 at Black Creek, and the Spadina Expressway. Tied to the DVP.

If we de-roadway Eglinton, I believe that some other corridor has to pick up the slack. There will be winners and losers - if every avenue sacrifices its traffic lanes, we will have a city where nothing goes anywhere. Or, we will have a huge volume of late night deliveries. (The "thump" that woke you up was UPS dropping your Amazon purchase on your porch.....at 3AM....)

If we move necessary traffic off Eglinton - a necessity if we reduce lanes - where do we route them?

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

In the context of completing a street that has been selected as a high volume transit corridor, which is about to attract the resulting densification, I will agree with you. Eglinton needs to become a "total avenue" - meaning it must be walkable, cyclable, traffic must be calmed, large vehicles must be diverted to some other path etc. The investment in a subway enables all this....so let's not waste the opportunity.

There is the problem however of ensuring that materiel and services have adequate and appropriate pathways into the city. No point in densifying and then having this denser community choking because deliveries have been forced off the traditional main avenues (Notice I didn't say "drivers" or "automobiles".... I'm thinking plumbers' vans, Purolator trucks, beer and food supply chain, and construction materials and so forth.)

Eglinton has traditionally been just such a pathway. It's the terminal pathway from the 401 in the West end, 400 at Black Creek, and the Spadina Expressway.

If we improve Eglinton, I believe that some other corridor has to pick up the slack. There will be winners and losers - if every avenue sacrifices its traffic lanes, we will have a city where nothing goes anywhere. Or, we will have a huge volume of late night deliveries.

If we move necessary traffic off Eglinton - a necessity if we reduce lanes - where do we route them?

- Paul

A valid question.

Some of which (by no means most) is addressable by changing the question to WHEN do you we move them.

Some deliveries can be restricted to evening hours or mid-morning or earlier on weekends or overnights.

Beyond that, I favour adding new roads to the grid. (expensive, but I believe necessary)

The grid should be 1km on square wherever practical.

One can't build all of that out quickly, nor should we.

But can put in place important pieces as shrink overly wide arterials down to size.

In the case of Eglinton West, there are already good alternatives in place to the north (that parallel both Eglinton and Lawrence)

Notably, Glencairn runs from Caledonia to Yonge.

While Beachborough/Castlefield/Roselawn/Elmridge runs from Keele to Yonge.

There should be workable capacity there for the most part; with the possible need some new left-turn lanes or the like.

I don't see a good corridor for expansion south of Eglinton W.

Rogers Road would be the obvious candidate to take east, but even getting to Bathurst would be hideously expensive and I'm not sure the value is there, eastward to Yonge doesn't make sense due to the presence of Cedarvale Ravine; and more expensive property!

 

[crs1026]

Notably, Glencairn runs from Caledonia to Yonge.
While Beachborough/Castlefield/Roselawn/Elmridge runs from Keele to Yonge.

I don't disagree, and I won't profess enough knowledge of the zoning, development history, and street flow in that area to debate intelligently.

A quick look at Streetview, however, certainly suggests that these streets are in many places 40 km/hr two-lane residential roads. Turning these into truck routes would undoubtedly create howls from residents.

Eglinton has been so constricted this past decade, thanks to Crosstown constructio, that maybe it's moot. By now, traffic may have found alternate routes, and infiltration may have solved the issue. However, Even today's traffic volume would not be compatible with the "total avenue" goal.

Every action has a reaction, is all I'm saying. There will be winners and losers if those lanes are removed. (I think they should be, but with a plan, and some courage to lay it out to the community)

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

A valid question.

Some of which (by no means most) is addressable by changing the question to WHEN do you we move them.

Some deliveries can be restricted to evening hours or mid-morning or earlier on weekends or overnights.

Beyond that, I favour adding new roads to the grid. (expensive, but I believe necessary)

The grid should be 1km on square wherever practical.

One can't build all of that out quickly, nor should we.

But can put in place important pieces as shrink overly wide arterials down to size.

In the case of Eglinton West, there are already good alternatives in place to the north (that parallel both Eglinton and Lawrence)

Notably, Glencairn runs from Caledonia to Yonge.

While Beachborough/Castlefield/Roselawn/Elmridge runs from Keele to Yonge.

There should be workable capacity there for the most part; with the possible need some new left-turn lanes or the like.

I don't see a good corridor for expansion south of Eglinton W.

Rogers Road would be the obvious candidate to take east, but even getting to Bathurst would be hideously expensive and I'm not sure the value is there, eastward to Yonge doesn't make sense due to the presence of Cedarvale Ravine; and more expensive property!

So, you are in favour of adding more traffic on other roads so that you can have trees? If your house was 1 km north or south of Eglinton, how would you feel about it being turned from a simple resitential side street into a major route?

If the road cannot fit trees, then don't put them. That does not make it a horrible street. It simply means you are working with the existing width.

 

[Northern Light]

So, you are in favour of adding more traffic on other roads so that you can have trees? If your house was 1 km north or south of Eglinton, how would you feel about it being turned from a simple resitential side street into a major route?

If the road cannot fit trees, then don't put them. That does not make it a horrible street. It simply means you are working with the existing width.

Kindly stop telling me what to do or think.

It doesn't give your opinion any more weight with me or anyone else.

You have a preference.

That's fine.

Its not mine; or that of many others.

Your aggressive tone is obnoxious and unwelcome.

 

[micheal_can]

Kindly stop telling me what to do or think.

It doesn't give your opinion any more weight with me or anyone else.

You have a preference.

That's fine.

Its not mine; or that of many others.

Your aggressive tone is obnoxious and unwelcome.

I am simply asking you to look at what you propose. I am not being aggressive. If you want to ignore what repercussions your ideas have, that is up to you. It will not stop anyone from pointing them out.

 

[Northern Light]

I am simply asking you to look at what you propose. I am not being aggressive. If you want to ignore what repercussions your ideas have, that is up to you. It will not stop anyone from pointing them out.

Your opinion, unsupported by a shred of evidence, carries no weight with me.

I have no further interest in this discussion with you, nor any other discussion with you.

 

[Jaye101]

There's no trees and no room for any..................that's awful!

That will make the area very unappealing aesthetically and for walkers, it means no respite from the hot sun and no wind breaks.

I'm all for bike lanes, but those should have come at the expense of a lane of traffic, not streetscaping.

I agree.

But looking at recent street reconstructions such as Roncy, St Clair and Spadina, I'd say hold the dramatics for the final product. While each of these street rebuilds do leave something to be desired, trees always seem to be a priority. Also, the final configuration shown here is at an intersection with turning lanes which reduce the right of way. I would hope the mid block configuration can make up for the lack of trees at the intersection.

The street does looks hostile at the moment. Looking at the new configuration on Bloor, I have faith that city staff will pursue the same ideals here. If not, I'll be right behind you with my pitchfork.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Think the overall plan is NOT to create want-to-be expressways along the arterial roads. Though some politicians and residents (who don't live in the area) do.

 

[11th]

In the context of completing a street that has been selected as a high volume transit corridor, which is about to attract the resulting densification, I will agree with you. Eglinton needs to become a "total avenue" - meaning it must be walkable, cyclable, traffic must be calmed, large vehicles must be diverted to some other path etc. The investment in a subway enables all this....so let's not waste the opportunity.

There is the problem however of ensuring that materiel and services have adequate and appropriate pathways into the city. No point in densifying and then having this denser community choking because deliveries have been forced off the traditional main avenues (Notice I didn't say "drivers" or "automobiles".... I'm thinking plumbers' vans, Purolator trucks, beer and food supply chain, goods for small retail stores, and construction materials and so forth. More density = more plumbers!)

Eglinton has traditionally been just such a pathway. It's the terminal pathway from the 401 in the West end, 400 at Black Creek, and the Spadina Expressway. Tied to the DVP.

If we de-roadway Eglinton, I believe that some other corridor has to pick up the slack. There will be winners and losers - if every avenue sacrifices its traffic lanes, we will have a city where nothing goes anywhere. Or, we will have a huge volume of late night deliveries. (The "thump" that woke you up was UPS dropping your Amazon purchase on your porch.....at 3AM....)

If we move necessary traffic off Eglinton - a necessity if we reduce lanes - where do we route them?

- Paul

The problem being Eglinton is one of the few routes that crosses the whole city. The next one north is Finch. We don't have a lot of alternative routes.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The problem being Eglinton is one of the few routes that crosses the whole city. The next one north is Finch. We don't have a lot of alternative routes.

If only there was an underground electric railway under Bloor Street/Danforth Avenue.

 

[micheal_can]

If only there was an underground electric railway under Bloor Street/Danforth Avenue.

You want cars and trucks to drive on the subway lines? They aren't streetcar lines....

How about this, double the property tax and base it off of real estate list prices. Use that money and build a world class transit system.
Or accept that there are some necessary evils within the city that will exist for the foreseeable future.

 

[W. K. Lis]

You want cars and trucks to drive on the subway lines? They aren't streetcar lines....

How about this, double the property tax and base it off of real estate list prices. Use that money and build a world class transit system.
Or accept that there are some necessary evils within the city that will exist for the foreseeable future.

You do know the definition of a "subway" is: "a railway system in which electric trains travel through tunnels below ground".

So both Line 2 (Bloor-Danforth) and Line 5 (Eglinton Crosstown) are "subways" as defined in the dictionary.

 

[micheal_can]

You do know the definition of a "subway" is: "a railway system in which electric trains travel through tunnels below ground".

So both Line 2 (Bloor-Danforth) and Line 5 (Eglinton Crosstown) are "subways" as defined in the dictionary.

It is also a sandwich shop chain. Still cannot move personal cars and transport trucks.

 

[Undead]

@Northern Light I can see how other forum dwellers might find some of your posts objectionable in terms of tone. I know I do sometimes. And this is not the first time I've seen you saying you're not interested in discussing something with someone after a small spat. Makes me wonder if the entire parade is marching out of step with Jonny. Which would be a shame because you're an insider in certain city building matters and your posts are often informative.